Ariel Powers-Schaub discusses her upcoming book about mid 2000’s horror, “Millennial Nasties!”
Author Ariel Powers-Schaub getting ready to play a game (photo taken from Instagram)
Though it seems like it was just yesterday to many “elder millennials,” it’s been 20 years since the horror boom that brought us “Saw,” “Hostel,” and many other bleak, gore-soaked slaughter fests. How did these films reach the heights of mainstream popularity for a good 10 years? Author Ariel Powers-Schaub’s debut book “Millennial Nasties: Analyzing a Decade of Brutal Horror Film Violence,” answers that question. Powers-Schaub chronicles and analyzes the films of the time period, while showing how America popularized the brutality it exported on a global scale. She spoke with us about writing the book, her hopes for the genre, and how the moniker of “torture porn” doesn’t do enough to describe the films we’ve come to love.
Macabre Daily: Is it true that “Millennial Nasties” started as a book about the “Saw” series?
Ariel Powers-Schaub: That was my original idea. It's my favorite franchise. I’ve written about it, talked about it, and thought about it a lot. As I started digging into it, I really wanted to talk about the influence of the “Saw” movies, but also the other movies at the time that were similar, but also doing different things. I just realized I had a lot more to say.
MD: Do you think you might still write a “Saw” book in the future?
AP: It’s possible. To be fully transparent, the “Saw” chapter was the hardest for me to write, because I felt almost too close to it. Like, I love it so much that I couldn’t take a hard look at it. If I do write a book on it, it will take me more time. I’m going to let [“Millennial Nasties”] come out first and we’ll see where we go from there.
MD: You’re clearly a fan of these films, and you must have seen them all many times, but did you get anything new from them after watching them for this book?
AP: When I started, I had a long list of films I was considering. I started watching them and seeing what commonalities and themes emerged. Also, what are the things they don’t have in common? For me, it was figuring out what films had things in common that didn’t seem like they would at first glance. “The Loved Ones” and “Repo: The Genetic Opera” seem like really different movies, but the familial themes in both of them were quite strong, and had a lot of overlap.
Another fun thing that emerged was that I noticed many of the same actors and filmmakers were involved in so many of these films, which led me to make the infographic at the end of the book. My challenge to myself was to connect all the movies back to “Saw” in 6 moves or less so I could call it “Six Degrees of Saw-peration.” That was fun. Lionsgate put out most of the films in the book, so that was an easy connection. Whenever I see the Lionsgate logo, I just get excited because they make everything I love.
Cover courtesy of Encyclopocalypse Publications
MD: What do you want to see in future “Saw” films that we haven’t already seen in 10 movies? I’m always curious how they manage to keep the franchise going.
AP: I thought we were saying goodbye to Tobin Bell with “Saw X.” Like it was going to be his swan song and future “Saw” films wouldn’t include him. But of course, “Saw XI” is greenlit with Tobin Bell. I certainly don’t mind that at all, but knowing John Kramer is involved, I’d love to go back to see some of his apprentices we haven’t spent much time with. I don’t want to spoil too much, but what about [the apprentice] from “Jigsaw?” I know some people think he’s boring, but what’s his backstory? Also, who are the two masked men at the end of “Saw: The Final Chapter?” I’m not opposed to a new direction at all, but I like the original franchise so much, I feel like if you bring back Tobin Bell, you might as well go back to your roots. I’m sure I’m going to like whatever they give me. I’d also like to see more stories about Jigsaw’s effect on the world. Are there more copycats out there in other cities? I’d even take more stories outside the original franchise.
MD: I mentioned in my review of “MIllennial Nasties” that you discuss direct-to-DVD sequels that won’t be talked about anywhere else. What value did you find in movies like “Joy Ride 2” that most people would write off as being cash-ins?
AP: Ultimately, I included [the films] that would best help me make my points. I left out some films because I thought they risked me repeating myself and taking away from the readability of the book. The straight-to-DVD movies were included because they helped support my point, whether they were well-known or not. If I thought they had something to say, I wanted to include them. If more people talk about my book, more people will say “hey, Ariel didn’t talk about this in her book. I want to read about this.” That’s kind of the dream. More gets written and there are more conversations about these movies because they do matter.
MD: Aside from the obvious “Saw” films, how did you decide what films to include?
AP: The list shifted over time. For a while, [my research] made me look like a crazy conspiracy theorist with a string board. I had titles written on post-its all over my wall. When I thought they shared a theme, I would group them together. I didn’t include “Wrong Turn 3” or “The Hills Have Eyes part 2,” though they came out within the decade. I didn’t include the remake of “I Spit on Your Grave.” I could have, but the nastiness in that movie comes more from being a remake than from the time period when it was released. I considered including “The Human Centipede,” but I decided not to, because it doesn’t share the vibe or the look of the other films I was covering. Maybe you can consider it an example of “extreme cinema,” but it wasn’t a millennial nasty.
MD: One of my favorite sections of the book covers the 2006 “Black Christmas” remake and 2009’s “Sorority Row.” Your insights about the latter actually reminded me of America Ferrera’s “Barbie” monologue.
AP: Thank you. That chapter is called “Punish the Bitches.” There are so many things to cover in the millennial nasty subgenre, and I didn’t want to focus solely on feminism, but I wanted to take a particular lens to feminism. At that time in our culture, there was a transition between second and third-wave feminism, which looked very different than it had in a long time.
I’m speaking in generalities as a culture, so of course there were exceptions to this, but we were supposed to “take the joke.” We weren’t supposed to get our hackles up if someone was being sexist or weird towards us. Sexual assault and harrasment were played for laughs. There were definitely expectations about how to be sexy enough, but not too sexual. There are characters in those two films who were portrayed negatively for drinking and having sex. I wanted to shine a light on the way young women and girls were shown in this time period. Of course, there were also final girls [in that era]. But in “Punish the Bitches,” I wanted to talk about what we told women to expect and how they were expected to respond to it.
MD: Going into the book, I thought all the films you covered would be “torture porn.” Not only was I wrong, but you start off explaining why we shouldn’t use that phrase. It’s going to take a while for me, by the way.
AP: Me too. It will take some doing.
MD: It’s been imprinted on all of us. But I was surprised to see you covered the “Final Destination” series in a book about this subgenre.
AP: I don’t take offense to the term “torture porn,” but I just don’t think it’s enough for what we need to refer to. Referring to “Hostel” as “torture porn” makes sense, but not the “Final Destination” films. The first one came out in 2000, just as we’re ending the ‘90s slasher cycle. It even looks like a ‘90s slasher, with the gloss, the teens, and the quips. But when you strip it down, it’s about death coming for teenagers. The onscreen kills get nastier as they go on, but they’re mostly in daylight. There’s no green or yellow filters or nu metal soundtrack, at least until the fourth entry. They don’t get lumped in, but I think they’re worth talking about as millennial nasties.
MD: It always felt like the “Final Destination” films weren’t as loathed as the “Saw” franchise, at least by critics.
AP: You’ll find more “Final Destination” fans who will say it out loud than you will fans of the other films I’ve covered. Hopefully that will change and we can be proud of the movies we like.
James Wan (left) and Leigh Whannell (right). The godfathers of the “millennial nasty.” (Photo: IMDB)
MD: What’s the link between the millennial nasties and the horror films of today?
AP: I say half-jokingly that James Wan comes along every 10 years and tells us what we’re going to do for a while. He gave us “Saw,” then “The Conjuring” 10 years later, then “Malignant” after that.
More seriously, as the millennial nasty era wound down, we took a hard swing into something totally different. We had heavy-hitting horror films, but they were different. They were way less graphic. They were more psychological and dealt with trauma, grief, and mental illness. Movies like “The Babadook,” “Get Out,” and “Hereditary” were very different from what came before. Every now and then, we have too much of one thing and we have to get away from it. We’re eventually going to swing away from those movies, and that’s why I bring up “Malignant.” I think that will be the film that guides the way, hopefully. “Dead Silence” walked so “Malignant” could run. That is my thesis [Laughs]. I think that we had to get sad for several years after the millennial nasties era ended, and now we’re pivoting to a fun, gory direction like with “Evil Dead Rise” and “Terrifier 2.”
Interview edited for length and clarity. “Millennial Nasties: Analyzing a Decade of Brutal Horror Film Violence” releases on September 17, 2024 in hardcover, paperback, and ebook wherever books are sold. Pre-order is available now from Encyclopocalypse Publications.
Stay up to date with “The Dark Side Of Pop Culture” by following Macabre Daily on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter.
